The Goat Pen

hedge wrote:"If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down."

No wonder I've never had kids...

married women shut that whole thing down the minute you put a ring on their finger

I didn't do much research --fact is part of fertility workups to figure why women can't concieve is to try to get them to relax and decrease stress during the time they are trying to have kids. I would think women being raped would face the exact opposite scenario--maximum stress/fear/anger/hate etc and conception would not occur.

I have a really difficult time believing there are 32000 pregnancies a year from rape.
first only 90,000 rapes are reported every year.
10% of those are male rape victims --the so called roll tide subgroup.
30% of rape victims are unable to concieve due to menopause or premenstrual
that leaves us with roughly 50,000 reported rapes of women capable of child producing which 32K getting pregnant is obviously extremly high
even if we go with unreported rapes resulting in childbirth which raises that 50,000 number to perhaps 200k--I have a hard time believing that many get pregnant,

But they all should have the right to abort

no, they should be forced to deliver the child, and then every pro-life wonk out there that thinks a child conceived as a result of a violent crime must be born should be individually taxed to pay for the child's care including their college education for 22 years.

I'd like to see how strong these people's religious convictions are when God tells them to pay for the child's upbringing born thru violence.

I'm not sure there is a point in this article but its worth reading , especially if you picture in your mind some of the less enlightened members of the GOP reading it.

http://www.theroot.com/blogs/paul-ryan/ ... end-matter

I'm not sure what the author's point is either. I guess he's trying to say just because you've had a black girlfriend doesn't prove you are not racist. Which I guess I would agree, but not sure if the author is inferring that Ryan is a racist, which I don't see any proof of that.

"just because you've had a black girlfriend doesn't prove you are not racist."

I guess that's true. Plenty of people have girlfriends and still think women are inferior to men. Doesn't mean they won't fuck em, though...

I have a really difficult time believing there are 32000 pregnancies a year from rape.
first only 90,000 rapes are reported every year.

Which leaves an arbitrary number of actual rapes. One could claim that there were really millions of unreported rapes!

Does Paul Ryan's Black Ex-Girlfriend Matter?

It depends on how she looks regardless of race, the same with every politician.

I wonder if she was thick...

In light of our recent discussion about gold, this is from a column by George Will:

"The modelers examined 19 commodities and said that 12 would be gone long before now — aluminum, copper, gold, lead, mercury, molybdenum, natural gas, oil, silver, tin, tungsten and zinc. Lomborg says:

Technological innovations have replaced mercury in batteries, dental fillings and thermometers; mercury consumption is down 98 percent, and its price was down 90 percent by 2000. Since 1970, when gold reserves were estimated at 10,980 tons, 81,410 tons have been mined, and estimated reserves are 51,000 tons. Since 1970, when known reserves of copper were 280 million tons, about 400 million tons have been produced globally, and reserves are estimated at almost 700 million tons. Aluminum consumption has increased 16-fold since 1950, the world has consumed four times the 1950 known reserves, and known reserves could sustain current consumption for 177 years. Potential U.S. gas resources have doubled in the past six years. And so on.

The modelers missed something — human ingenuity in discovering, extracting and innovating. Which did not just appear after 1972.

Aluminum, Lomborg writes, is one of earth’s most common metals. But until the 1886 invention of the Hall-Heroult process, it was so difficult and expensive to extract that “Napoleon III had bars of aluminum exhibited alongside the French crown jewels, and he gave his honored guests aluminum forks and spoons while lesser visitors had to make do with gold utensils.”"

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will081812.php3

Hedge. You shoulda gone with Gold back in 02 when I told ya to. Not my fault.

Has anyone accused Paul Ryan of being racist? I think most people just accuse his party of it. If anything, I thought the "ist" title most likely to be bestowed on Paul Ryan is sexist.

It is of mild interest that he tasted a little bit of that brown sugar. But, Owlman brings up a good point...was she an Angela Bassett sista, or a Jennifer Beals/Mariah Carey sista? Even then it doesn't matter. Paul Ryan obviously loves his wife and daughter, but apparently doesn't feel it's right for them to have a choice over what they do with their bodies. He maybe rationalizes it as an unfortunate consequence of Eve fucking everything up by eating that quince and giving some to Adam.

Bitches always fuck up a good thing, it seems. Paul Ryan must feel they need to be protected from themselves. His "personhood" laws are obviously for their own good...even if it means a woman goes to jail for murder because she doesn't want to bear the child of the man who raped her.

Bklyn wrote:Has anyone accused Paul Ryan of being racist? I think most people just accuse his party of it. If anything, I thought the "ist" title most likely to be bestowed on Paul Ryan is sexist.

It is of mild interest that he tasted a little bit of that brown sugar. But, Owlman brings up a good point...was she an Angela Bassett sista, or a Jennifer Beals/Mariah Carey sista? Even then it doesn't matter. Paul Ryan obviously loves his wife and daughter, but apparently doesn't feel it's right for them to have a choice over what they do with their bodies. He maybe rationalizes it as an unfortunate consequence of Eve fucking everything up by eating that quince and giving some to Adam.

Bitches always fuck up a good thing, it seems. Paul Ryan must feel they need to be protected from themselves. His "personhood" laws are obviously for their own good...even if it means a woman goes to jail for murder because she doesn't want to bear the child of the man who raped her.

and just like Sarah Palin, Obama's camp is going to be all over the "do you really want to take the chance that this guy is president after Romney?'

The GOP needs to just have a guy come out and say "look, I ain't got time to mess with this social shit. I'm going to focus on one thing and that is getting our fiscal house in order"

THAT guy would get elected

The guy who would get my vote would be the guy saying "I want to get government out of the business of business. It's not the job of government to run the economy." Of course, nobody will say that. Government is the biggest (by far) business out there, and we're stuck with it. Everybody believes that it's up to government to run/fix/tweak "the economy". When did that happen? How? Why? I don't know, but that's the entire source of our problems. The only job of government (federal, anyway) should be to provide national defense and ensure individual and social and civil liberties. We're way too far gone to ever get back to that, though...

Everybody wants government out of the business world until they need it in their business world.

What you're talking about in one sense is pure Capitalism...and pure Capitalism is no more a viable economic model than pure Socialism. It just makes for good slogans to cry for government to get out of the way, instead of fucking things up with child labor laws, minimum wage requirements, pension protection fees and regulations, bank capital requirements, waste disposal regulations, non-price collusion oversight, foreign and domestic bribery rules, anti-money laundering rules, business and country investment restriction lists, consumer protection oversight and other business prevention hurdles that governments put in place.

On the other side, if you're saying that government should not get involved in free enterprise investment (the Solyndra argument), then you push the clock back on the creation of the world wide web, the jet engine, the railway network, great invention that is Tang and a whole list of products/services that were created or spurred by government that would have undoubtably come to existence much later (if at all) were it not for government capital and research making it happen.

We live in the manner we live today because of government being all up in business' shit. It's not that government is too deeply entangled with business to get them out now, in my opinion. It is that government plays such a necessary part in the relationship between business and consumer that we should not remove government from the equation. I think the more legitimate argument/question is at what level should government play a role in business?

there are alot of people that think government is the answer. I find it to be a crutch.

The answer to what? Sometimes government is the answer, but it should not and can not be the answer to every question. I wonder how many people really believe that the government is the answer to everything. I think the number would be very small, but people make it seem like a whole half of the country is clamoring for the government to take over everything. I just don't see it.

"Everybody wants government out of the business world until they need it in their business world."

That's not the impression I get. Almost all candidates run on the economy (recall Reagan's "Are you better off now than 4 years ago?", Clinton's "It's the economy, stupid", and what will certainly be Romney's major focus against Obama), and most voters seem to think the president should single handedly be held responsible for the entire nation's economy. Of course government is and should be involved in business, I just don't think it should be the federal government. The more local, the better, IMO. Shit will sort itself out...

Bklyn wrote:The answer to what? Sometimes government is the answer, but it should not and can not be the answer to every question. I wonder how many people really believe that the government is the answer to everything. I think the number would be very small, but people make it seem like a whole half of the country is clamoring for the government to take over everything. I just don't see it.

Shut your trap, liberal scum!

hedge wrote:"Everybody wants government out of the business world until they need it in their business world."

That's not the impression I get. Almost all candidates run on the economy (recall Reagan's "Are you better off now than 4 years ago?", Clinton's "It's the economy, stupid", and what will certainly be Romney's major focus against Obama), and most voters seem to think the president should single handedly be held responsible for the entire nation's economy. Of course government is and should be involved in business, I just don't think it should be the federal government. The more local, the better, IMO. Shit will sort itself out...

I think you're probably a racist.